| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#16
October 5th 04, 12:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Dave Heil
writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , (N2EY) writes: (Avery Fineman)(so desperate to get past spam filters that he changes screen names)wrote in message ... In article , (N2EY) writes: So...was all this "phase noise" invisible way back in the 1990 time? It didn't exist? That you didn't read the published material does not mean that the material did not exist. The synthesizer phase noise issue was debated well before 1990. It is referred to in QST product reviews of ~20 years ago. It only came up when a frequency synthesizer was incorporated? :-) Synthesizers were in wide use prior to 1990. The phase noise issue became important as synthesizer circuits became common in transceivers. I'll invite to read up on the subject. I've provided several urls. There are numerous other sources of information on the subject. Why not avail yourself of some of them? Compare the transmitted noise spectra of an SG2020, Elecraft K2, and K1. Guess where that noise comes from? R70s were made 1982-84 (approximately), so the design is at least 23 years old (1981). You frequenctly denigrate others as "behind the times", yet the R70 is the newest/most modern piece of HF radio equipment you mention owning. Just another example of "do as Len says, not as Len does". That little Icom R-70 still works fine, as advertised. While I doubt that the receiver functions as advertised, I have no trouble believing that it works as designed. Ya missed the point. Other designs are criticized because of age - but not the R-70. Guess why. I've got one. You don't. :-) Don't want one. If somebody gave me one, I'd sell it. I'm sure it is quite a nice piece of equipment for the casual SWL. I'm happy for you. The only thing I "recycled" was some paper to get one in working order. :-) I recall you mentioning that. "Cash" wasn't it? Use of a credit card would have muddied the waters. I paid cash for all the parts in the Type 7.... "Phase noise" wasn't a big buzzword then. It has a three-loop PLL in it plus a microcontroller. Sensitivity is still good and comparable with any contemporary HF receiver. "Phase noise" wasn't a big buzz word in the Icom engineering and sales bunch. Elsewhere, the use of the term was already common. Like amongst hams. I've yet to get close to the concept of sitting around a shack making as many contacts as possible in a given time as any "sport." It's called "competition". Skill and endurance are certainly big factors in winning any amateur radio contest. Neither is that activity "pioneering the ariwaves" nor any sort of "training for emergencies" to reasonable-thinking human beans. Did you ask any? No claims for contests as pioneering the "ariwaves" have been made. Any on-air activity which requires speedy, accurate operation is good training for emergency situations. Contest operation also points up the weak points in any radio station. The contest and DX folks have pushed the need for better rigs for decades. Like chess or checkers or board games, radio contesting is a GAME. So are all sports. Like the Olympic GAMES... There are some similarities. A good strategy, playing within the rules and some luck are involved. No board games that I'm aware of require putting up big antennas at height, putting together a radio station or planning sleep breaks. Think car racing. Bicycle racing (Lance Armstrong wasn't riding a three-speed with baloon tires) It is FAR from an ATHLETIC sport. Not if done correctly. Let's see....I run as exercise and also a sport. Done two marathons and more half-marathons, ten-milers, 10Ks and 5 milers than I can recall. Mike Coslo is a hockey player. What sports do others participate in? Not as spectators! You *do* sound just like him, Len. Lots of words and lots of put-downs and lots of theory. But in terms of actual radios built on your own time, with your own resources, from your own design....nada. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Nothing. Not that anyone here knows about in all your years and petabytes of posting. If I had extra copies, I could, with a year or so off to do it, digitize those things and put them on a website that allowed at least 100 MB user space. That includes corporate documents (public) along with photographs. The challenge is for *homebrew* radio projects. Not stuff done for work. Not worth it, since the typical PCTA extra "commentary" (to use a word very loosely) would be totally derogatory. You mean you fear reaping what you sow? My little text and photo memorabilia on the ADA assignment takes 6 MB in PDF. Did you design and build ADA on your own time, with your own resources? I thought you had no need of rank, title or status. YOU have REJECTED simple things like a digitized license repro in the past. I didn't ask for it. I had already said I'd take your word that you had one. But you sent me*several* unsolicited emails with unknown attachments of large size. (Ever hear of compressing a file before sending?). How was I to know what they were? I found out later that one attachement was a picture that contained male nudity. Not my cup of tea, so to speak. You would be expected to reject anything I present...as "credentials" or whatever real proof there is...and there is a lot of it. It's real simple, Len: Pick an HF radio project that you did in your home workshop as a "hobby" activity. Not something for work, or something you did as part of a group, but something you dreamed up and built yourself, just for the fun of it. Not some accessory, either - a complete receiver, transmitter or transceiver. Put a picture and a short description on your AOL homepage, just like I did. We don't need megabytes or a long diatribe. Just a .jpg and a short description. My project is out there for all to see. Where's yours? Or are you too afraid of what others will say? -- Rank, title and status? Tsk. I lost interest in DXing in "radio sports" and the wallpaper collection of QSLs after working at station ADA long ago. To each his own. Why do you denigrate what others find as fun? What is wrong with live and let live? A federal REGULATION requiring morse code testing in order to get an AMATEUR license to operate on HF is NOT "live and let live." Yes, it is. Sure it is, Leonard. You have the same opportunity to take and pass such an exam as I did. The REGULATION doesn't single you out. I don't know why the term "AMATEUR license" bothers you. That's what the exam is for--an "AMATEUR license" to operate an AMATEUR radio station on HF. Be that as it may, you didn't bother to answer the question about you denigrating what some radio amateurs do for fun. Why would it bother you that someone participates in a contest? I mean, it isn't as if you are actually involved in amateur radio. Exactly. And guess what: If the code test goes away, contesting in amateur radio will continue. Some contesters are actually *for* doing away with the code test on the grounds that it will allegedly get more hams on HF, thereby raising their scores by having more folks to work and making some sections/countries/zones less rare. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ??? | Policy | |||
| US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ??? | Policy | |||
| US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ??? | Policy | |||
| New ARRL Proposal | Policy | |||
| My restructuring proposal | Policy | |||
Threaded Mode
